Even if we accept that biological differences in capability exist in all the capacities that people arguing against equality claim they do... it's not two separate and distinct realms. It's two closely-overlapping bell curves - clear distinctions can only be made among statistical outliers. Pick whatever fuzzy section around the peak of that curve and call it "average", and even within those constraints there is enough overlap that there are lots of average women who equal or outperform lots of average men, and vice versa. Perhaps individual capability is more relevant than sex?

I'd like to know what the 'biological differences' crowd would say if it were somehow demonstrated that an all-female military would actually be more effective. Because I think I can anticipate some of the reactions, and I doubt it'd lead to men being removed from the frontlines.

Wouldn't it be fascinating to have an all-female military? To the best of my knowledge it hasn't really been something we've ever seen before in history. I really do wonder what it would be like and what (if any) differences we'd observe.

I dislike the idea of conscription under any circumstance. Forcing someone to serve in the military is ridiculous in the modern world. Conflicts are fought at twenty thousand feet through precision, laser guidance systems; not grunts on the ground. Only occupations require a fielded military... And as anyone who's paid attention to the middle east in the past ten years can tell, you, its not a very efficient use of soldiers.

Having said that one of my issues with women in combat is along the lines of it is hard to protect the fairer sex from things like rape if captured. Now some pretty nasty things can happen to male combatants, but stuff like rape for whatever reason hits me on a more personal level. Thus I have an issue with women in combat not because of capability but all things being equal men do not get raped.

Now I am sure I shall be promptly crucified here for this point of view, but I have never seen anyone address this issue to my liking.

I kind of wish we had this kind of discussion back here... unfortunately, there was no time for it. Our military actually started admitting voluntary female recruits only the late 1990s - and it was considered a big change then (heck, the man who is currently our president? He was the Defense Minister back then and he actually claimed that women shouldn't be allowed into officer schools etc. He claimed it was a threat to "female dignity" etc.). And then, only ten years later, our military dropped conscription altogether. So, there was no time for discussing the possibility of conscripting women...

But I'd really, really like to see this kind of discussion. I'd love to hear what our feminists would say about that...

Personally, I hope that the Canadian female soldiers asked that a military bra would have none of these awful ribbons and bows that plague ordinary bras...

I qoat his to correct you: The U.S draft exists still. All men at 18 are required to sign for involitary draft. We just havent evoked it for years. It exists, we sign it ( it is a fed offense not to.) It's simply not in proccess at this time. Tomorow can be the next world war, and congress can vote in a draft.

American women do not sign. Frankly, feminists are not rushing out the door to change that. And the goverment wont, feminist would quickly bully and ruin any one involved. (They say they would change it if they could, but we all know the word oppression will get labeled on such a vote.) I assure you, most current gen feminists are narcissist melenials that discovered they can blame everything on others and sound entitled and important while doing it. All while the wiser and older ones, or select few with a lick of sense face palm and try to patch the holes of their sinking ship. It's why I call myself aglitarian, as to not connect my self with it's current and highly toxic community's. Which preach falacies, half truths and over generalized bs, all a while oppresing any man or women with I differing opinion.

(I coulda just said over entitled bullies but, I like to talk in detail. ^^ )

Steampinket:

Quote

Less rape on civilian populaces during wartime and occupations?

Oh ya, because a women would never rape. Their presence would totally keep war crimes at a minimum, after all, we are talking about women. Fellow human beings that are just as liable of human evil as they are good. They could never enact base human instinct, would never straddle and force themselvs on a man, or kill a kid with a back pack because he may have a bomb. Nope, human error and human evil is a mans issue. More women in the army would just make things automatically more humane in times of war. Keep those dastardly men with twirling mustaches in line. "Keep your willy in your pants."

Quote

Having said that one of my issues with women in combat is along the lines of it is hard to protect the fairer sex from things like rape if captured. Now some pretty nasty things can happen to male combatants, but stuff like rape for whatever reason hits me on a more personal level. Thus I have an issue with women in combat not because of capability but all things being equal men do not get raped.

Now I am sure I shall be promptly crucified here for this point of view, but I have never seen anyone address this issue to my liking.

See, people dont seem to understand rape. It is not just something a guy or gal does for gratification. No. It is the most effective fear tactic, the most effective way to dehumanize some one. Break them, hurt them. Not just for torture, but for pleasure. A rapist is not typically a lonely person, a lonely person can simply use porn. A rapist is a Sadist. Men do get raped, in prison more often then not, but I wouldnt put it past troops in war to rape a dude just to make him feel worthless. Rape is not just for pleasure, it's to hurt another in the most harmful way imaginable.

Men dont get raped? I feel sorry if you ever go to prison. Just... Dont drop the soap... It's not a myth. Men do get raped, the very comment that they dont is just.... Gross. Gives a empty feeling in the stomach. Believe me it happens. Ive known male rape victims. The problem with slogans like "Teach men not to rape." Makes it easy for people to forget men can be raped, and not only men do it. It is a sad horrible thing, and it does happen.

I assure you, most current gen feminists are narcissist melenials that discovered they can blame everything on others and sound entitled and important while doing it.

My apologies, its difficult to do this without coming across like a bitch, but I can't work out what word you meant by the highlighted word. The best I could get was "menials" which doesn't seem to make sense in context.

Sorry again,I really hope this doesn't come across as condescending or similar.

American women do not sign. Frankly, feminists are not rushing out the door to change that. And the goverment wont, feminist would quickly bully and ruin any one involved. (They say they would change it if they could, but we all know the word oppression will get labeled on such a vote.)

Or, possibly, not.

Quote from: Wikipedia

In 1971, draft resisters in the United States initiated a class-action suit alleging that male-only conscription violated men's rights to equal protection under the US constitution. When the case, Rostker v. Goldberg, reached the Supreme Court in 1981, they were supported by a men's rights group and multiple women's groups, including the National Organization for Women. However, the Supreme Court upheld the Military Selective Service Act, stating that "the argument for registering women was based on considerations of equity, but Congress was entitled, in the exercise of its constitutional powers, to focus on the question of military need, rather than equity.

My apologies, its difficult to do this without coming across like a bitch, but I can't work out what word you meant by the highlighted word. The best I could get was "menials" which doesn't seem to make sense in context.

Sorry again,I really hope this doesn't come across as condescending or similar.

No, you dont sound bitchy at all my lady. Thanks for the link there Blyth, im glad you helped so people can understand my wording. >_<

Quote

In 1971, draft resisters in the United States initiated a class-action suit alleging that male-only conscription violated men's rights to equal protection under the US constitution. When the case, Rostker v. Goldberg, reached the Supreme Court in 1981, they were supported by a men's rights group and multiple women's groups, including the National Organization for Women. However, the Supreme Court upheld the Military Selective Service Act, stating that "the argument for registering women was based on considerations of equity, but Congress was entitled, in the exercise of its constitutional powers, to focus on the question of military need, rather than equity.

Sorry for the confusion, I am not speaking of past feminism or groups, I am speaking of modern ones. You know.... The ones that would probably spit in my face for saying they are narcissist. Just because women in 1971 tried, doesnt change the fact that the women of today, out crying over shirts and video games, would. (I believe they would, not care to change the draft.)

Listen, in the past things were probably more civil. Male rights advocates and womens rights advocates worked together on common goals, thats great. But, I dont think they would today. Frankly, watch women who protest at men rights events, and you can see there is no getting along there any more.

See, this leaves us with a problem. You claim that feminism wouldn't oppose the draft, I point out that the one time its been to court feminism did oppose the draft. You claim that its now changed. Neither of us know for sure, obviously, but the sole piece of evidence we actually have suggests you're wrong.

Listen, what I am saying is. Just because it HAS, doesnt mean the entirely new generation of people WILL. The new generation are DIFFERENT PEOPLE. With DIFFERENT opinions, and DIFFERENT concerns. The past is the past, the future the future, the present the present. In the present, it is not the same women, and they do not by default share the same exact opinions or views. (By default due to them being their own person's.)

In essence my dear Kythia, I am stating an opinion. Perhaps I did so as fact, but none the less an opinion. I may not have no evidence. But women long old retired, or dead is not evidence they will. Only that they have tried, this generation has NOT and frankly I dont see them doing it. You cant prove they care, just as much as I cant prove they dont. Simple fact remains, most act like they do not.

Sorry if my opinion offends you. But I simply find it hard to believe the feminists of today act in my best interest.

Oh! Thats good to know. Not that I need validation, but when some one makes it clear they are not mad it is... Well refreshing. I am an in general passive dude. I detest making people mad or uncomfortable, it's why I tend not to be on these boards in spite of my strong views and opinions.

Listen, what I am saying is. Just because it HAS, doesnt mean the entirely new generation of people WILL. The new generation are DIFFERENT PEOPLE. With DIFFERENT opinions, and DIFFERENT concerns. The past is the past, the future the future, the present the present. In the present, it is not the same women, and they do not by default share the same exact opinions or views. (By default due to them being their own person's.)

In essence my dear Kythia, I am stating an opinion. Perhaps I did so as fact, but none the less an opinion. I may not have no evidence. But women long old retired, or dead is not evidence they will. Only that they have tried, this generation has NOT and frankly I dont see them doing it. You cant prove they care, just as much as I cant prove they dont. Simple fact remains, most act like they do not.

Sorry if my opinion offends you. But I simply find it hard to believe the feminists of today act in my best interest.

Sorry,k but "X will not happen!" is not an opinion, it's a statement of fact.

You're singling out feminists here - as Kythia pointed out, it hasn't been to court since. Why is only one group responsible for that?(For the record, I'm a feminist, and I oppose the draft for everyone. It's barbaric and needless.)